http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/28/judge-blocks-part-of-controversial-arizona-immigration-law/?hpt=T1&iref=BN1

 As expected, no surprises here. The Klan should pack up and move back to Kentucky.

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

The Arizona law is same duplicate as federal law.  Should maybe the entire US declare KKK membership and all move to Kentucky?

This is what your problem is, Anton.  As with all liberals (as you have become one, apparently, though like all of them you deny the terminology).  To people like you, everyone who disagrees with your point of view is a racist or klan member.  So Arizona tries to set a new law that is an exact copy of the federal law that just isn't being enforced.  So, Arizona wanted their law enforcement to have the right to enforce the federal laws that weren't being enforced.  The only reason it got struck down is because of 1 small part:  allowing a law enforcement officer to check immigration status on someone who is already being taken in for breaking a law.

So all those who support this are klan members?  C'mon, Anton.  You of all people HATED this kind of *** from the left and now you're doing it.  That's not cool.  I understand that you don't want to support any immigration enforcement, you want all illegals to be all-ok.  Fine, and whatever your reasons, I see no problem with that.  But your little comments like 'klan can move back to Kentucky' is kinda insulting, don't you think?

IntensityInsanity:

The Arizona law is same duplicate as federal law.  Should maybe the entire US declare KKK membership and all move to Kentucky?

 

This is what your problem is, Anton.  As with all liberals (as you have become one, apparently, though like all of them you deny the terminology).  To people like you, everyone who disagrees with your point of view is a racist or klan member.  So Arizona tries to set a new law that is an exact copy of the federal law that just isn't being enforced.  So, Arizona wanted their law enforcement to have the right to enforce the federal laws that weren't being enforced.  The only reason it got struck down is because of 1 small part:  allowing a law enforcement officer to check immigration status on someone who is already being taken in for breaking a law.

So all those who support this are klan members?  C'mon, Anton.  You of all people HATED this kind of *** from the left and now you're doing it.  That's not cool.  I understand that you don't want to support any immigration enforcement, you want all illegals to be all-ok.  Fine, and whatever your reasons, I see no problem with that.  But your little comments like 'klan can move back to Kentucky' is kinda insulting, don't you think?

 II, brush up on the Supremacy clause in the US Constitution. It does not take a scholar to understand this. States cannot copy paste Federal Law - IT IS THIS SIMPLE. Under US Constitution, Immigration falls under Federal powers. End of story. No butts, no ifs, no nothing. This is not very hard to understand, is it? All states agreed to this when they all ratified the constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land.

Also, quit acting like you never heard of this before. This EXACT ISSUE was already tried in California in the 90's (1994 I believe, but you can Google). It was overturned in the Federal Court, because it was unconstitutional. This is what's referred to as case law. The precedent already exists, and for those of us who research things, it is NOT suprising.

Finally, are you concerned for the Klan? Lol. The last I heard, blacks/jews/russians and any other kind of non-redneck were still not allowed in the Klan. Just Google it up, the attorney who had "drafted" the Arizona "law" works for a white power organization. It is a FACT.

Last but not least. Most of us here arrived to this country with a great deal of difficulty and expense. We had to follow the law, pay attorney fees, etc etc. I do not, NOR HAVE I EVER, supported any sort of law breaking. But two wrongs don't make it right. I am actually suprised you missed this. A bad law would not address the larger issue of slave workforce. Only Comprehensive Immigration reform would do that. Immigration is not one of those black and white issues. Personally, I am for controlled borders, but I also realize that in this day and age of NAFTA and cross border commerce we need a better framework for managing immigration. What sort of framework? There could be many variations, but this is what I propose:

+ Have all illegals register, pay fees and costs, admit to breaking immigration law.
+ Process them for background checks, fingerprints and English.
+ Those who passes, gets 5 year work visa VISA with ability to travel, and 5yr restricted SSN so they can pay taxes.
+ Everyone else gets rounded up and deported.

Now, that's my stab at it. Notice, I do not want them to be citizens, but I also understand they came here braving some rather strong odds, and I can respect that. I do recognize the American spirit in that, so I accept them for VISA issuance.

We can deal with this issue with class and foresight, or we can go the Arizona route and have white power movement and no-high-school-diploma governor fan the flames of Latino racial anger. I prefer the former.

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

+ Have all illegals register, pay fees and costs, admit to breaking immigration law.
+ Process them for background checks, fingerprints and English.
+ Those who passes, gets 5 year work visa VISA with ability to travel, and 5yr restricted SSN so they can pay taxes.
+ Everyone else gets rounded up and deported.

Surely, you must then be in favor of checking the status of detained individuals, considering its a requirement for each of your 4 points.  It appears your opposition to this law stems from a constitutional technicality, which is certainly a valid argument.   Why, then,are you spouting racist accusations on people who support this on the state level, while you, yourself, support it on federal? 

Anton, with all due respect, you make an even less convincing liberal, than you ever did a conservative. And in some ways, that's a compliment

Egor:

AHTOH:

+ Have all illegals register, pay fees and costs, admit to breaking immigration law.
+ Process them for background checks, fingerprints and English.
+ Those who passes, gets 5 year work visa VISA with ability to travel, and 5yr restricted SSN so they can pay taxes.
+ Everyone else gets rounded up and deported.

Surely, you must then be in favor of checking the status of detained individuals, considering its a requirement for each of your 4 points.  It appears your opposition to this law stems from a constitutional technicality, which is certainly a valid argument.   Why, then,are you spouting racist accusations on people who support this on the state level, while you, yourself, support it on federal? 

Anton, with all due respect, you make an even less convincing liberal, than you ever did a conservative. And in some ways, that's a compliment

I was always FOR detainment. Where did I ever say I wasn't? Detainment by ICE, not police. It seems you guys would rather play word games with me...Please do not waste my time?

I'll attempt once again to explain this, as clear as I can:

The SB1070 law is racist. It was drafted by people employed by the white power movement. Yes, these people are racist. Does it make each and every supporter racist? I do not know. If one is aware of the laws origins, yet they ignore the facts, are they racist? I am not the one to make this judgement. I also did not say that ALL SB1070 supporters are in the Klan, I just said that the Klan should pack up and leave back to Kentucky (where the official headquarters is). All of what I said is factual. It seems you guys are trying to put words in my mouth - que pasa?

By the way, my version of the reform proposal, this was the only thing you had questions on, besides the Klan?

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

1) I did not mention the Klan once

2) What component of the law is racist?  Quote it, and then tell me how the federal law avoids this in its wording.

3)I do not care who drafted any legislation.  My response to any legislation or idea is based on content and substance.  Any law I (or you) support, will have fingerprints and signatures on it of people whom we despise.  By that standard, one can support nothing.  Incidentally, have you checked out the original designers/supporters of the federal law?  I heard some of them may have had sex with a goat.   

4)Speaking of racism.. the idea of roundups... for instance - home invasions, false arrests based on race, forced separation of illegals from their US-born citizen children,  stinks of Gestapo to me. While logically I could be in favor of it, I cannot support it as a human being. And I am being pigeonholed with the racists, by someone who supports it.  What mutation in the frontal lobe of the human brain, has allowed people to become so intellectually dishonest, and not ashamed to display it in public?

5)If you send all the racists to Kentucky, you will only have 1 state support your proposed roundups and deportations.  Liberals are a little smarter that that, I am sure you will learn more as your magical journey of self-discovery continues. For instance, with your views, you are going to have to fight off some racists accusations yourself.  I've always found situational irony a beautiful thing

6)Slightly off topic..Maybe not. If Conservatives run a black candidate against a white elitist liberal, am I going to be allowed to call liberals who vote against them racist?  When rightfully confronted, I can always say something cowardly, like "Does it make each and every supporter racist? I do not know".

Except when I don't know something, I tend to not open my mouth..

...Egor, your logic deteriorates, the further you go...

1. Forget about the Klan.

2. The one that states that police officers are going to ask for ID anyone who looks like immigrant. What do Arizona immigrants look like? Latinos. This is very similar to "driving while black". If you do not understand the dwb concept, this would also be lost on you. Suffice it to say, several Phoenix police officers files their own lawsuits against state, charging that SB1070 would have them discriminate racially. Somehow, I tend to believe them.

3. Well, it's too bad that you are purposefuly blind to "who drafts the legislation". In this day and age one should be a little more situationally aware, no? What's your excuse?

4. I agree. Nowhere did I say go door to door rounding up people left and right. I said those who did not register would be rounded up by ICE, whenever the opportunity presents itself. I support the idea that anyone born here is US citizen, and I reject the idea of "anchor children". All US born children are American. By the way, did you know that in the fall AZ state will work on the law that would make US born children of illegals also illegal?

5. Not all racists, just the Klan. So the rest of your point is irrelevant.

6. Whaaaaaa?

Man, you gotta put forward stronger arguments, this is too lame...

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Egor:

 I heard some of them may have had sex with a goat.    

Finally we got to something interesting, where I can tune in.

 If I'm pro-abortion and pro-Arizona Law, does it make me a liberal or conservative?

Speaking of Arizona, why can't they just check everyone in a single sweep? they only have like 6,5 million people. Can be done in a single day.

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

The one that states that police officers are going to ask for ID anyone who looks like immigrant.

I asked for a quote, not an interpretation.  The law is specific, and interpretation by law enforcement is prohibited both implicitly and explicitly.

I also asked for you to show how the federal law avoids this in its language. 

AHTOH:

What do Arizona immigrants look like? Latinos. This is very similar to "driving while black". If you do not understand the dwb concept, this would also be lost on you.

Then Mexico is the one who is racist, because they only send us Latinos :) But to be serious, here is an example.  Say a different type of crime is commited..  Arson or something.  Witnesses are questioned, they all saw a Latino man with a gasoline container.  Police start looking for Latino suspects, targeting them specifically because of their race. 

This is the same thing.  As you stated, Arizona immigrants look like Latinos.  You've already profiled, great job and detective skills. Enforcent based on the profile you (a liberal) have provided, is no longer subject to this double-jeoperdy, it is the way law enforcemnt is done everywhere its effective.

AHTOH:

 Suffice it to say, several Phoenix police officers files their own lawsuits against state, charging that SB1070 would have them discriminate racially. Somehow, I tend to believe them.

Believe what specifically?  They don;t discriminate racially already, when told to look (for example) for a white guy who raped a woman?

AHTOH:

 

3. Well, it's too bad that you are purposefuly blind to "who drafts the legislation".  In this day and age one should be a little more situationally aware, no? What's your excuse?

The Bill of Rights was drafted by slave owners.  So i reflect your question back to you.  I explained my position well.

Granted, as a modern "liberal", you may oppose some or most of the bill of rights, so maybe it was not a good example.  But surely, you are aware, that for every law you support, one can find someone you despise who contributed or supported it.  As is said, by that standard, one can support nothing.  You let that go, so I assume we are in a greement, and you can retract your statements.

AHTOH:

  I agree. Nowhere did I say go door to door rounding up people left and right. I said those who did not register would be rounded up by ICE, whenever the opportunity presents itself.

AHTOH:

I support the idea that anyone born here is US citizen, and I reject the idea of "anchor children". All US born children are American. By the way, did you know that in the fall AZ state will work on the law that would make US born children of illegals also illegal?

Isn't that a contradiction? Anyone supporting that law that causes"anchor children", clearly must support the idea of "anchor children".  Or you are saying you reject the term because its offensive to the latino boat owners?

I don't know how i feel about the law, I would probably feel a lot better about it with fewer illegal immigrants being allowed to take advantage of it, and at least a reasonable enforcement of immigration policy.  If that's not going to happen, the law must be re-interpreted.  Notice, i did not say changed.  Children born to foreign diplomats in the US are, of course, NOT US citizens.  Maybe you would support a law, Anton, treating all illegals like foreign dimplomats :) 

AHTOH:

Not all racists, just the Klan. So the rest of your point is irrelevant.

That was not a premise to my point. But if you don't want to address it, that's fine. 

"I asked for a quote, not an interpretation."
"You don't seem to have a formed opinion yet on what you actually want done"

 Look, you want me to do all the homework for you so you could "critique"? No, thank you. I surely do have opinion and it goes something like this: Arizona approach is nothing short of Nazi Goebbels tactics. While not all illegals should stay here, SOME should. Visa consideration should be given to length of stay, family ties (US born children) and lack of criminal record. This is what I would support wholeheartedly. Did I think of everything and formed an opinion on every single premise, with quotes? Of course not. But I can tell right from wrong and the current anti-immigrant rhetoric coming from the right, teabaggers and Klan is just plain wrong.

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Like usual, when one has no good argument, one resorts to referring to klans, ***, etc.

Seriously, I do want a quote to see where in the law it says to, "The one that states that police officers are going to ask for ID anyone who looks like immigrant."  You said this, Anton.  Back this sh!t up, or retract that statement.  You yourself acknowledged that this law is same as federal law.  And your problem with this was that (according to you) it is unconstitutional for states to protect borders in this capacity.  So following your logic, you would be OK with federal police offers rounding up anyone that looks like an immigrant?  Seriously, everything you write is absolutely ridiculous, and jam-packed with racist this, klan that, white power, etc.  What is your infatuation with this?

And the whole thing about teabaggers is also pretty stupid of you.  You wrote that teabaggers can't spell, barely educated, and stupid, etc.  Well, what if I am a teabagger?  Am I uneducated?  Let me ask you this:  find me some official documents written BY the tea movement that shows poor grammer/spelling mistakes...I mean, where do you get this crap?  I think you hear these talking points and like a parrot you just repeat it, having no clue what you're talking about.  Oh, I forgot, I know a black guy who is into the tea movement.  Should I ask him if he hates Jews and is pro-slavery?  After all, according to you ALL teabaggers are racists, and just upset about how bad it is for 'whites'??????

Seriously, Anton, your arguments are pathetic, even embarassing.  You say a lot of BS but come up with absolutely no materials to support your point.  Do you understand that all you are doing is slandering people/groups.  Yes, if you call me a racist but have no evidence to present that I said or did anything 'racist' then you are just slandering me and nothing else.  Any idiot can slander someone.  It's not impressive.

Show me where in the law it says that cops are to round up people because they 'look' immigrant.  show me where tea party official documents have spelling and grammer mistakes.  show me tea party positions or official statements that are racist or about white power.  And don't give me that crap, "well, there's some teabaggers that did this or that".  I don't care.  You know what, you vote for Obama and I bet there's some Niggas that voted for him who smoke crack and rape women and pop caps in people.  So am I gonna say now that all Obama voters are criminals who rape and kill people?  C'mon, Anton, you really think you've become that smart and everyone else that stupid?

II, you must be living on another planet, or do not have TV and Internet? Dang, bro, "git educated"!

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/23/williams-resigns-as-tea-party-express-spokesman/

 And here's the signs, courtesy of the American ignorant Proletariat:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/16/10-most-offensive-tea-par_n_187554.html

As to the SB1070, here is a good read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_SB_1070#Challenges_to_legality_and_constitutionality

Note that the current Federal Law does not give police any immigration mandate. There is no such thing as "Federal police". That's pretty easy to understand, right? Feds enforce immigration law two-fold:
1. ICE agents carry out immigration enforcement via place of employment raids and via specific gathered intelligence.
2. Federal immigration judges process immigration cases and inquiries, from local state law enforcement officials.

Please note that currently police can and does refer law breaking illegal immigrants to Federal immigration judges. It's just in the past, the law breaking had to qualify to such measure. I believe the threshold was misdemeanor and above that, the case would be referred to the Feds. Now, you can get stopped and questioned as a part of ongoing police inquiry, which is essentially new law and new local state police powers.

PS. What's up with the rant? Hard day at work? Solar flairs?

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

Anton, I was not asking you, god forbid, to do homework.  Because I would expect that a person with certain opinions, would have done that homework ahead of time.  I seriously thought you had these answers already.  I was then going to ask you how you reconcile them with your opinions.  Maybe you'd retract them.  Or maybe one of us would learn something in the process. That's all.

I am all set now, sorry for bothering you

P.S. There have been some killer points made in this topic by II as well.  You are either going to address them (it can be done, you know, your opinions may have more merit than even you realize), or you are going to retract your statements.  Or, you can do the usual, and we are all just wasting our time here.

Did you read your links yourself?  "I am not your ATM" is a racist sign?  Sure there were some that could be quasi-racist, but let me take a third stab at what i consider to be common sense. 

Every group has racists. 

Liberals have racists. do you deny that?

Conservatives have racists.  I know you don't deny that.

Most of our founding fathers were racists, by comparison with whom, even the most racist signs you posted, are a picnic.   These racists gave you the freedom to slander people without getting your ass kicked.  Let's repeal that (since they were racists) and have you answer for your words

Every bill ever signed into law, every proposed piece of legislation, every group, club, congregation, gathering of people may have racists.

For each of them, anyone with too much time on their hands and some alterior motives, can make the whole group look racist, and demonize everything that group does. 

And i am not even mentioning allegations that people with those signs may be "planted" in the crowds in the first place, by people who find people like you, Anton, way to easy to manipulate.  There is major allegations brewing on this front.

At the very least, we know of instances where these people have been shouted down and removed/banned from Tea Party functions.  Just as they have been from liberal, conservative, libertarian, you name it, functions.  Anywhere, where their leadership anda majority of participants say "you are not one of us, we don't want you here".

Notice, I could not make any of these arguments for a truly racists entity. We don't need yellow journalism to know nаzis are racist, or KKK is racist.

Anton, bottom line, if you are going to make allegations slandering hundreds of thousands of people (or tens of millions non-Obama voters), you do have a responsibility of a burden of proof.  Sorry.  That is just common sense.

And if your method is slandering 5 people per week, you'll need plenty of patience and a project manager.